* Krikket
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
* Krikket
[11-23-03 22:43]: [snip ...] Can you include more than one address on a reply-to line?
Have you tried?
[snip ...]
I've poked around looking for soemthing like this, yes. But never found anything.
Some of the effort must be your own. You will not learn to solve your own problems if you make no effort. You didn't even include the 'Reply-To:' header in you post.
And I could go into the evils of using "reply-to" and why it's a bad thing in general. But that's already been touched off on this list recently. Nor have I been completely convinced that it's not a bad thing for general use. But I'm willing to listen to counter-arguments. Which is one reason why I asked those questions in the first place.
You should research your data. 'Reply-To:' is bad for for mail-list addresses, not to achieve personal responses to list mail.
I'm willing to listen to counter-arguments, but I see no reason why I should research something to convience you.
Think again. There is no inconvenience to me. You posed the lack of means to achieve an objective but appear to be unwilling to experiment ways proposed to reach that objective.
I'm more than willing to let things go as is -- I've been happy with the result. The additional tweak would be nice, but that's all. I don't consider it worth the time or effort to put much into it.
Then there's your answer. You aren't interested.
Remember, you're the one who's annoyed by things, not me. I'm just asking for a way of minimzing your annoyance.
Incorrect again. I have a procmail recipe that /dev/null's duplicates because individuals of your mindset are not interested in netiquette. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org